@Veradux » Since you keep removing the tags, I want to know how this is less "cunnilingus through clothes", than almost anything with that tag. Say this for example, post #1515541 , or this post #3522902 , or this post #4136585
At the very least how does the fall out of line with the other Jack "implied cunnilingus" tag, post #3054780 - Which I also wonder how that's not cunnilingus through clothes, as it falls in line with numerous examples of that tag.
I feel like at least one of these two is the right call, and I didn't make the wrong judgement. So I'm curious if you could explain why you think I did.
@Veradux Deleted my original response, because I think I misunderstood your comment entirely, apologies. So let me clarify, you believe this and the other Jack picture are too ambiguous between anilingus and cunnilingus, correct? So I think ambiguous oral would probably make sense here, I'm not sure if that might be splitting hairs too much or not...since it would possibly need to be applied to a bunch of the content tagged with implied cunnilingus, and that tag be removed from those pictures. Not sure if we need the permission of an admin/mod, but lets say it's approved, would "ambiguous oral through clothes" be a secondary tag for pictures like this?
Honestly, it's probably fine to leave without the tags. People looking for cunnilingus posts coming across this image probably aren't looking for this pose.
But, yes, I think this is too ambiguous to tag either one. Kama might not be licking at all. And, yes, I think there are many other images that could have the tag removed.
While you don't need the explicit permission of an admin or mod, it would be a good idea to raise a discussion thread in the forums before going ahead. Some people might be against it, some people might help out, and I'm certain someone will have some suggestions on naming conventions and writing a wiki.
Honestly, it's probably fine to leave without the tags. People looking for cunnilingus posts coming across this image probably aren't looking for this pose.
But, yes, I think this is too ambiguous to tag either one. Kama might not be licking at all. And, yes, I think there are many other images that could have the tag removed.
While you don't need the explicit permission of an admin or mod, it would be a good idea to raise a discussion thread in the forums before going ahead. Some people might be against it, some people might help out, and I'm certain someone will have some suggestions on naming conventions and writing a wiki.
Well without the addition of the new tag you proposed, I think this and the other are fit for the "implied" cunnilingus tag. As it fits other pictures within the tag, and the implication is that there "may or may not be licking", since the tag is used for cases where we see a face in front of a crotch, under a crotch, so fourth, but no licking is shown. So is it fine if I tag both this and the other with it? Or should we wait/request for another party to help mediate this discussion?
